This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a
wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to
be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out
how to edit a page, or use the
sandbox to try out your editing skills.
New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to
log in (although there are
many reasons you might want to).
108.35.59.228 (
talk)
11:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)reply
One more that I've heard of
The story may be a fake, but that's how I heard it.
Apparently the u.s. once almost started the war. Back then (probably no later than the 50s) when most bombs were still carried by planes. One such airforce base did not have an air traffic control tower and thus no way to communicate with aircraft once they were sent on their way. One night a guard heard some strange activity at a fence and mis-identified this as possible Soviet special forces trying to enter the base. He telephoned another part of the base from where the aircraft crews were ordered to their planes and to take off. The guard then investigated the fence and found it to be a bear. He called back, but the aircraft were already starting their engines. Then someone drove a Jeep on the runway with the headlights towards the planes, to block the runway. This stopped the incident. Later it was determined that the guards had only recently been warned of the possibility of some special forces maybe trying to sneak into the base. As a result, all low-end bases were upgraded with flight-control towers.
On 2021-09-25T00:18:07 user:115.166.25.16 inserted "[sic]" between "24" and "megaton", claiming, "24 January 1961: 24 megaton is in the source but is wrong."
As widely reported in the news a few days ago,
Putin claimed to have put Russia's nuclear forces on 'special alert'. My view is that this is not suitable for inclusion on this page, for two reasons:
Common to many entries of this list is that genuine readiness was made for nuclear war (bombers scrambled, missiles ready to fire etc.). In my view, Putin's claim doesn't seem to convey this; it just seems like rhetoric designed to warn the West to back off. Rhetoric like this has been used before (mostly during the Cold War) and doesn't merit an entry in this list.
This is related to a
current event, and thus this situation is yet to fully play out. Furthermore, inclusion of this would be an example of
recency bias.
I'm interested to hear arguments to the contrary, I've realised in thinking about this that it might be suitable for inclusion, I'm just erring on the side of not including it. @
Morgankarki: since we've been engaged in a little reverting, what say you? —
JThistle38 (
talk)
23:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Definitely not a close call, and no one has been able to say what 'special alert' means. The lead here says "an incident that could have led to at least one unintended nuclear detonation or explosion" -- if russia launched a nuke right now it would not be unintended. And like you said this is an on going incident. There is zero evidence anyone has been close to pushing the button
Strangerpete (
talk)
00:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't think it yet qualifies for inclusion. The closest I can see was probably the
discussion among Russian commanders about use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine which took place in November 2022. I don't think it qualifies unless a later source indicates that a strike was actively considered during that meeting, otherwise it's just more of the continued debate about nuclear doctrine. As with many of the Cold War close-calls, I suspect we won't have the full details until years after this conflict ends. --
ERAGON (
talk)
08:50, 14 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Are reactor near-misses allowed?
Is it okay to put near-misses where a nuclear reactor nearly failed, or is it for Nuclear weapons only? I think yes, and am putting in the 2022 bombing of Zaporizhzhia fire, but if not then feel free to undo my edit. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
SqueakSquawk4 (
talk •
contribs)
20:27, 4 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The first sentence in this article says, "A nuclear close call is an incident that could have led to at least one unintended nuclear detonation or explosion." A reactor melt down would NOT be considered a "nuclear detonation or explosion", I think.
DavidMCEddy (
talk)
20:31, 4 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I would partially consider it to count (e.g. chernobyl had a large explosion as part of the meltdown), but I accept your point. Do you know of a page for near-misses for meltdwons? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
SqueakSquawk4 (
talk •
contribs)
21:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)reply